4.3 Article

Improving Cardiovascular Care Through Outpatient Cardiac Rehabilitation An Analysis of Payment Models That Would Improve Quality and Promote Use

期刊

JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR NURSING
卷 29, 期 2, 页码 158-164

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/JCN.0b013e31828568f7

关键词

cardiovascular diseases; rehabilitation; delivery of healthcare; organization and administration; healthcare reform; referral and consultation; standards; reimbursement mechanisms; organization and administration

资金

  1. Pfizer Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Much attention has been paid to improving the care of patients with cardiovascular disease by focusing attention on delivery system redesign and payment reforms that encompass the healthcare spectrum, from an acute episode to maintenance of care. However, 1 area of cardiovascular disease care that has received little attention in the advancement of quality is cardiac rehabilitation (CR), a comprehensive secondary prevention program that is significantly underused despite evidence-based guidelines that recommending its use. Purpose: The purpose of this article was to analyze the applicability of 2 payment and reimbursement models-pay-for-performance and bundled payments for episodes of care that can promote the use of CR. Conclusions: We conclude that a payment model combining elements of both pay-for-performance and episodes of care would increase the use of CR, which would both improve quality and increase efficiency in cardiac care. Specific elements would need to be clearly defined, however, including: (a) how an episode is defined, (b) how to hold providers accountable for the care they provider, (c) how to encourage participation among CR providers, and (d) how to determine an equitable distribution of payment. Clinical Implications: Demonstrations testing new payment models must be implemented to generate empirical evidence that a melded pay-for-performance and episode-based care payment model will improve quality and efficiency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据